Modify/Deprecate Concepts: (classical KBOs and other small solar system objs)

[katieefrey]

Name the concept in question Several concepts in question...

Borasisi Ceres Deucalion Eris Haumea Huya Ixion Logos Makemake Orcus Pluto Quaoar Sedna Teharonhiawako Varuna

Describe the change Are these noteworthy enough to keep in the UAT? If so, should the preferred label include their object number (i.e. 58534 Logos)? Most of these are not likely to be confused with something else the way "chaos" was (see https://github.com/astrothesaurus/UAT/issues/325).

Please include any additional comments/feedback The UAT is not a catalog of objects. I'm inclined to deprecate a few of these.

[katieefrey]

I found some notes in the UAT Beta version, these originate from the third party company that made the original UAT merger:

2012/12/05 11:42 NT Pluto added by jack_bruce 2012/12/05 11:42 NT Haumea added by jack_bruce 2012/12/05 11:42 NT Makemake added by jack_bruce 2012/12/05 11:42 NT Eris added by jack_bruce 2012/12/05 11:34 BT Plutoids added by jack_bruce 2012/12/05 11:33 NT Sedna added by jack_bruce

All of the other concepts from my list (Borasisi, Deucalion, Huya, etc) exist in the UAT Beta, but there are no notes for them.

I can find Ceres and Pluto in the IVOA Thesaurus (Ceres is also in the IAU thesaurus).

I cannot find any of the other concepts on this list (Borasisi, Deucalion, Huya, etc) in the IVOA Thesaurus, the IAU Thesaurus, ASK, or PACS.

Based on this, it looks like all concept, except Ceres and Pluto, were added by the third party company.

I think deprecating everything except Ceres and Pluto is the way to go. Markus Demleitner concurs via email.

[katieefrey]

Usage in literature seems to be one of the best indicators of whether or not a named object should be included as a concept, so I wrote a quick and dirty script to search ADS (astronomy database only) for a list of named concepts (combines concepts above with other names objects that have been suggested).

Note that the script simply searches for the named object in question as a general query, so hits from author names, or satellite names, or software programs, etc could all be inflating the total number of results. Still, I think this is a decently representative results, with the understanding that this caveat applies.

named obj	refereed	non-refereed	total
Deucalion	0	2	2
Teharonhiawako	1	1	2
Borasisi	2	1	3
Logos	5	12	17
AnneFrank	8	11	19
Ixion	13	19	32
Huya	14	13	27
Braille	19	50	69
Varuna	22	45	67
Dactyl	27	39	66
Orcus	28	45	73
Makemake	28	75	103
Quaoar	34	95	129
Mathilde	60	91	151
Masursky	64	118	182
Haumea	80	130	210
Eris	93	149	242
Sedna	95	140	235
Gaspra	150	190	340
Grigg-Skjellerup	199	201	400
Itokawa	223	538	761
Borrelly	275	432	707
Wild-2	331	594	925
Tempel-1	355	640	995
Iapetus	396	644	1040
Giacobini-Zinner	463	533	996
Ida	486	598	1084
Charon	513	971	1484
Hale-Bopp	583	915	1498
Callisto	694	1225	1919
Ceres	871	1623	2494
Enceladus	967	2702	3669
Ganymede	1068	2196	3264
Vesta	1095	2001	3096
Eros	1140	1213	2353
Triton	1347	1181	2528
Europa	1656	4167	5823
Pluto	2450	3525	5975
Uranus	3082	3916	6998
Io	3339	4614	7953
Titan	3619	7785	11404
Halley	3772	4360	8132
Neptune	4685	5939	10624
Mercury	7738	8343	16081
Saturn	9750	14043	23793
Venus	10167	13121	23288
Jupiter	20206	23008	43214
Mars	23122	49842	72964
Moon	47367	57194	104561
Earth	93451	83714	177165

If I just kept named objects that have at least 1k refereed papers in ADS, that would be a pretty reasonable list, in my opinion.

[katieefrey]

Added concepts: Comet Halley Eros Vesta Ganymede Triton Europa Io Titan

Deprecated Concepts: Borasisi Deucalion Eris Haumea Huya Ixion Logos Makemake Orcus Quaoar Sedna Teharonhiawako Varuna

Even though Ceres is under 1k refereed papers, there is already a UAT concept for it and I don't think it makes sense to deprecate it now.